Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunchmeister
The WA design is by far the best in terms of design, however, WA guns, considering their price, blow chunks. By the time you've got the weak internals upgraded for reliability and get an RA Tech bolt with NPAS to get it to field-legal limits, you've paid as much in upgrade parts as you did for the initial gun. And you're still stuck with a weak plastic receiver that flexes as well as other random plastic externals that should be metal. It makes WA a rather poor choice IMO. While the design is good, the execution is poor.
If you want the WA design, then you have to shell out the cash for the G&P WOC (which still needs some work to be fieldable) or shell out the big bucks for an Inokatsu which is fieldable out of the box. To me, these are the only real options when you're going for a Magna-based rifle. By the time you get a WA completely upgraded to be useable, you've paid as much for it as an Inokatsu anyway, so why not just get the Ino to start with? I chose Inokatsu because of that.
I haven't tried either the KJW or WE yet, but both seem to be good guns for their price range. You give you a little in terms of realism with the action (particularly with KJW), but in terms of functionality, they both work great. I'd personally go WE because you start with a metal receiver out of the box, but either seems like a good choice.
|
I agree with you on this point, if you start from a G&P WOC, its almost as expensive as an inokatsu after you upgraded it. but ,here is not like 2 years ago, you can use those aftermarket parts to build 1, my very own WA GBBR was completely built up from scratch, cost me no more than 900 bucks with ra-tech bolt (this is the one cost the most), full steel internal, CA metal body and it works great.
i am not saying WE/KJW M4 are totally crap, its all depends on how you play the game. you got what you pay for. for me, maybe I put realistic on the priority position, but again, its all about how you play the game.
May 16th, 2010, 01:42
